GANESH RANGNATH GAWATE. AURANGABAD,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 100/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 February 2024AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the NFAC's order did not discuss the merits of the issues as it proceeded to decide the appeal based on the assessee's non-appearance. Therefore, the Tribunal remanded the case back to the NFAC for a fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2012-13 was against an order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144. The assessee did not appear before the Tribunal, and the case was proceeded ex-parte. The Revenue argued that the assessee failed to explain the source of cash deposits and provide justifiable reasons.

What were the issues?

Whether the NFAC properly adjudicated the appeal on merits when the assessee failed to appear, or if a remand was necessary for a fresh hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “SMC” BENCH : PUNE :

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 26.02.2024Pronounced: 27.02.2024

BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.100/PUN./2024 Assessment Year 2012-2013 Ganesh Rangnath Gawate, W-Wing, Bharat Bazar, MIDC Chikalthana Road, The Income Tax Officer, MIDC, Aurangabad. Ward – 1 (8), vs. PIN 431 001 Aurangabad. PAN AIUPG6052A Maharashtra. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : -None- For Revenue : Shri Gaurav K Singh Date of Hearing : 26.02.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 27.02.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1054982530(1), dated 09.08.2023, involving proceedings u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

2.

Learned DR Shri Gaurav Singh vehemently argued in light of both the lower authorities findings that neither this assessee could explain source of the impugned cash deposits amounting to Rs.31.31 lakhs despite being a non-filer nor he could

2 ITA.No.100/PUN./2024 submit any justifiable reason in course of re-assessment framed on 02.12.2019 as well in the lower appellate proceedings.

3.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the Revenue’s foregoing vehement submissions and find no reason to accept the same in entirety. This is for the precise reason that the NFAC’s order under challenge has nowhere discussed merits of the various issues raised therein once it had proceeded to decide the assessee’s appeal for non-appearance. Faced with the situation, it is deemed appropriate in larger interest of justice that the NFAC needs re-adjudicate the assessee’s appeal afresh preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing subject to the rider that it shall be the taxpayer’s onus and responsibility only to file and prove all the relevant facts. Ordered accordingly.

4.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 27.02.2024.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →